The Pass Happy SEC Reconsidered
We all know that the SEC is a run-heavy conference, right? To be sure, we have reached the point to where offensive "balance," loosely defined, is considered a must, but clearly the general thinking among many talking heads and most fans is that any offensive design needs to be tilted towards running the football. The consensus among talking heads and casual fans alike, for whatever reason, focuses on how teams are striving to achieve a 60/40 run/pass split. I can personally sure you that will hear Gary Danielson cite that every single week this Fall, for example. But is all of that stuff really true, and does the generally accepted notion of the 60/40 run/pass split realistically describe modern day SEC football?
I asked those very same questions last year, and after a bit of research I ultimately came to the conclusion that none of those generally accepted notions contain any real truth. I frankly have no clue where the notion of a supposedly ideal 60/40 run/pass split came from, but one way or the other it is not embodied in the raw data. Not a single team in the SEC was as conservative as the 60/40 run/pass split -- Auburn ran the ball more than any other team in the conference, about 58% of the time -- and only the War Eagles and Georgia were even remotely close. Furthermore, despite all of the notions about the SEC being a run-heavy conference, the exact opposite was true. In fact, in 2007, the SEC saw more passes than runs, and eight teams in the league were effectively throwing the football 50% of the time or higher. Despite popular contention to the contrary, the SEC was in fact a pass happy conference.
I ran those numbers again recently for the 2008 season, using the same methodology, and the ultimate conclusions were the same, if not to an even greater degree. The following are the run / pass ratios for the SEC teams in the 2008 season:
As you can see, the SEC was a pass happy conference yet again in 2008, as expected. Only three teams effectively ran the ball more than 50% of the time, and the conference as a whole once again saw more passing attempts than rushing attempts. In fact, far from the ideal 60/40 run/pass split, as a whole SEC teams threw the ball roughly 52% of the time, and ran the ball only about 48% of the time.
Digging deeper, the conclusions become even more definitive. For example:
- Tennessee ran the football more than any other team in the conference besides Alabama, but the numbers are a bit misleading. In their first six conference games, Tennessee threw the football roughly 55% of the time, and ran it only 45% of the time. Those numbers, however, completely flipped with the results of the final two games against Kentucky and Vanderbilt, when an ousted Phil Fulmer, tired of watching his quarterbacks throw games away, ran the ball 104 times against only 17 passing attempts. Those two outlier games turned UT into a run-heavy offense on the whole, but the point remains that they were predominately a passing team throughout the majority of the season.
- Florida's spread option scheme heavily utilizes the quarterback as a rushing threat. Furthermore, Florida spent most of the season annihilating opponents to the point of where the game would be effectively over by halftime, and should have theoretically been spending the rest of the game running out the clock. Nevertheless, despite all of that, Florida still threw the football over 47% of the time.
- Auburn had terrible quarterback play all season long, and Tony Franklin was fired mid-way through the season. Furthermore, they played in close games all year long (sans the Iron Bowl), but nevertheless still ended up throwing the football almost 54% of the time.
- LSU likewise had terrible quarterback play, with Jarrett Lee tossing pick sixes left and right, and with a true freshman leading the way the past two games of the season. Furthermore, they also had one of the strongest running games in the SEC, led by Charles Scott and a stout offensive line. Even so, the Bayou Bengals still threw the football right around 50% of the time.
The only true run-heavy team in the conference was Alabama, where the Tide ran the football almost 65% of the time. From the outset, this answers any lingering questions about whether or not such a run-heavy team can still win big; clearly they can, and it should come as no surprise. There is no surer way of victory than to be able to consistently and repeatedly line up and run the football straight down your opponent's throat. Of course, though, having all of the pieces in place in order to be able to do that consistently is a very difficult thing to do, and the 2008 Crimson Tide was very much a rarity in that it had all of those pieces in place. Also, the run / pass numbers for the Tide are skewed a bit because we spent most of the season with huge leads at which point we were just trying to run out the clock for the remainder of the game. Without having done the specific research just yet, I imagine our run / pass splits were nowhere near this extreme in situations where the game was still very much in contention. Furthermore, moving forward, with Nick Saban having lined up three highly-touted quarterback recruits, more than ten wide receivers rated four-stars and higher, and several elite tackle prospects, the Tide will air it out much more often in the coming years. Even for Alabama, the extreme run-heavy levels of 2008 will be an anomaly.
Once again, on the whole, the conclusions seem quite clear. Talking heads may go on and on about how the SEC is a run-heavy conference, but that is simply not the case. That may have been true many years ago, but the modern day SEC is simply a pass happy league.
ed- As some of you may have noticed, I did not include Ole Miss in this analysis, just as I did not include Arkansas last year. The reasoning in both cases was their widespread usage of the Wild Hog / Rebel, and with both teams using that so heavily, it made them effectively impossible to fit into this type of analysis. With tailbacks and wide receivers lining up at quarterback and occasionally throwing the football, etc. it’s just impossible to get a good grasp on what was actually going on without specifically breaking down the game film.
I will say, though, even if you apply this exact same methodology to Ole Miss’ 2008 season, they would have been one of the more run-heavy teams in the conference, but nothing overly special. They were 55% run and 45% pass, and the difference is negligible to the point that the overall conference run / pass splits only drops a few tenths of a percentage point as a whole.
0 recs |
19 comments
|
Comments
Great rundown
I love these types of statistical arugments. Good stuff.
"What happened yesterday is history. What happens tomorrow is a mystery. What we do today makes a difference - the precious present moment." -Nick Saban
by HarveyBirdmanAAL on Jun 24, 2009 11:28 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Big Request
But i think it would be interesting to run the same analysis on the “pass happy” big 12 with their vaunted quaterbacks in 08. I have no idea of how the numbers would pan out, but it would be interesting if they mirrored the SEC as they are deemed the passing conference and we the running conference.
I’m sure you have much better things to do with your time and I, for one, appreciate you taking the time to put this together, so no worries if its not possible.
Roll Tide!!
by touncy28 on Jun 24, 2009 12:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Raw Numbers
Here’s the raw numbers for the Big 12, without the adjustment for QB runs that OTS put into the SEC numbers. These are just intra-Big 12 games; no out of conference or bowls included:
Texas Tech: 62.3% pass / 33.7% run
Missouri: 58.6% / 41.4%
Texas A&M: 57.8% / 42.2%
Iowa St.: 56.5% / 43.5%
Kansas St.: 51.6% / 48.4%
Kansas: 50.5% / 49.5%
Colorado: 48.1% / 51.9%
Texas: 47.4% / 52.6%
Nebraska: 46.9% / 53.1%
Oklahoma: 46.9% / 53.1%
Baylor: 37.4% / 62.6%
Oklahoma St.: 37% / 63%
The top two are notorious pass-happy teams, and No. 3 is coached by a West Coast Offense guy. Nos. 3 and 4 were also bottom feeders that played from behind a lot (ergo, more passing).
Oklahoma is really low because the Sooners racked up giant first half leads and bled the clock in the second halves of games. In their two losses, which were close throughout, OU had a 41/26 pass-to-run ratio (Texas) and a 41/29 pass-to-run ratio (Florida).
Baylor leaned heavily on its running quarterback Robert Griffin. Oklahoma State’s Kendall Hunter was the conference’s only 100 yards a game back (119.6), and his 1555 yards were by far the most at more than 300 yards above the next guy. OSU’s quarterback Zac Robinson did a fair bit of running himself as well. Texas’ QB Colt McCoy did a lot of running too (he lead his team in yardage).
The Big 12 got the pass-happy reputation because its quarterbacks put up PlayStation numbers week in and week out. They get them not necessarily by throwing for a higher percentage of play calls than other conferences, but by throwing accurately and for a high average. The SEC quarterbacks last year obviously threw quite a bit, but they did so for lower completion percentages and for a lot fewer yards.
Team Speed Kills
SBNation's SEC Blog
by Year2 on Jun 24, 2009 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great stuff...
… I tell you, those numbers really eye-popping when you look at them. The Big XII was even more run-heavy than the SEC, and that is without taking “fictional running plays” — i.e. scrambles, sacks, and kneel downs — into account.
I’ll be honest, I would have expected the Big XII to be a good bit more pass happy than that.
by outsidethesidelines on Jun 24, 2009 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It probably was a little more pass-oriented once sacks and scrambles are accounted for, but about half the conference had regular, designed quarterback runs as a part of the game plan. There also seemed to be a lot of running back by committee going on, and when there’s no one single rusher taking the spotlight, it makes things more pass-oriented than they actually are.
That, and the entire season we never heard the end about the quarterbacks.
Team Speed Kills
SBNation's SEC Blog
by Year2 on Jun 24, 2009 1:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
interesting
A quick glance at the team I consider to by the most run-heavy offense in the nation among BCS schools, Georgia Tech, ran the ball approximately 79.5% of the time. At some point, you have to pass a little, just to keep the defense off-balance.
Also, the numbers you compiled for the Big 12 may be off.
Your numbers for Tech only come out to 96% of the plays they ran.
by Beergut on Jun 29, 2009 7:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice analysis...
The top 4 teams on the list had no viable options at running back, at least not a horse you could rest you gameplan on, so the lesser of the two evils in this case will always be to throw the ball.
MSU had a much better running back in Dixon than their quarterback by committee, but they found themselves behind so often, that passing would tend to happen more often when you’re playing catch up.
For Auburn, they only passed more than ran in one game: Ole Miss, so those numbers may not be accurate.
For UGA, it’s obvious why they passed more…
LSU and UT’s QB situation was THAT bad, so I can see that.
You explained UF, and nothing needs to be said about Bama, as that’s just the gameplan.
"There's a lot of blood, sweat, and guts between dreams and success" - Coach Bryant
by TopDaddy on Jun 24, 2009 12:07 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
OK, I see what you did here, my bad...
You did JUST SEC games, and you were comparing called pass plays versus called run plays, not the actual result of each play, right?
It’s a great analysis, but with the lack of experienced QBs overall in the SEC last year, I don’t think you can assume that half of all QB carries were either sacks or scrambles. I think it goes a bit deeper than that for some teams. For instance, I remember Fran calling plays for Watts that were one receiver, 5 yard outs, and if that receiver wasn’t open after a three step drop, he was to run. So was that play planned run or a planned pass? That happened all the time, and I think something similar may have happened with teams like Auburn last year. In checking the numbers, I saw that AU QB’s “ran the ball” 10+ times in all but 2 SEC games (7 and 9), and Burns “ran the ball” 19 times in one game for 20+ yards.
Now, would the “half” theory work with teams like Bama? Most definitely! Georgia? Yes! But as far as it being universal, I think it goes a bit deeper than that. I know you don’t have hours a day to go through the play by play for 8 SEC games for 12 SEC teams, but for the sake of a simple statistical analysis, it’s a great discussion point.
"There's a lot of blood, sweat, and guts between dreams and success" - Coach Bryant
by TopDaddy on Jun 24, 2009 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right...
I’m looking at called pass plays and called run plays, not what they ultimately end up as. That’s the real problem with just looking at the raw numbers… busted passing plays, sacks, QB kneels, etc. all improperly inflate the rushing totals.
As for the “half theory,” on the whole I think it’s right. Now I’m not going to say that in specific instances that it might not be valid — in particular, since you mentioned Fran / Watts, with option teams — but on the whole I think it does a good job of taking into account busted passing plays that end up as runs.
Furthermore, as I mentioned last year, I actually tend to believe that it significantly underestimates the number of passing plays. Take Alabama for example… last year John Parker Wilson had almost 40 rushing attempts in conference play. Using the half theory, do you remember 20 designed runs to Wilson last year? Obviously not, and frankly aside from a handful of sneaks, I don’t remember any. You probably had at most 10 or so designed rushing plays (mostly sneaks), and the rest were sacks, scrambles, and kneel downs.
by outsidethesidelines on Jun 24, 2009 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Auburn ran the ball more than any other team in the conference, about 58% of the time
Does that include the times Kodi Burns was running for his life?
"A demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." -H. L. Mencken
by Bens4vcobra on Jun 24, 2009 12:35 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That was for 2007...
"There's a lot of blood, sweat, and guts between dreams and success" - Coach Bryant
by TopDaddy on Jun 24, 2009 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I
know I just wanted to take a dig, aight!
"A demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." -H. L. Mencken
by Bens4vcobra on Jun 24, 2009 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OTS
you should do another write up on so-called vaunted SEC defenses. Score boards were lit up last year in the league, and I wonder if the stereotype on the other side of the ball remains true.
"A demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." -H. L. Mencken
by Bens4vcobra on Jun 24, 2009 12:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Um,
Florida and Alabama lit up some scoreboards, as did Georgia occasionally. No one else really did with any consistency. All scoring is up versus 20 to 30 years ago of course, so I guess it depends on what you’re comparing last year’s scoreboards against. I’d be willing to bet though that most conference games had at least one team scoring 21 points or fewer in them.
Team Speed Kills
SBNation's SEC Blog
by Year2 on Jun 24, 2009 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem...
… with doing that is one of properly dispensing credit. Say you run an analysis and you see that significantly more points were scored in one year than another, exactly what does that mean? The easy conclusion is that defenses were down, but that’s not necessarily correct. It could very well have been that offenses were just very good and that explains the discrepancy. Again, the problem ultimately becomes that even if you find increased scoring, you really cannot say if it’s because defenses were worse, offenses were better, or a combination of the two, and if it the latter it is even more difficult to determine the respective amounts of credit should be awarded to each.
Year2 is right, though, that scoring is up over 20-30 years ago, but again that doesn’t necessarily mean defenses have gotten any worse. The field has literally changed since then, as the hashmarks are now more narrow — as a result, defenses cannot use the sidelines as a twelfth defender as much (Bill Oliver was the master of that) — and frankly there have been a lot of philosophical changes on offense. Teams are no longer so adverse to risk, and such extreme premiums are no longer placed on time of possession. Scoring is up over a generation ago, but again it does not necessarily mean defenses have gotten any worse.
by outsidethesidelines on Jun 24, 2009 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It
would be interesting none the less. Maybe do it over the next year or two since the SEC seems to be getting more offensive-minded coaches with Petrino, Meyer, Mullen and Kiffin. You could include Nutt in that group even though he went from one SEC team to another.
"A demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." -H. L. Mencken
by Bens4vcobra on Jun 24, 2009 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's just smart football...
…no need to throw the ball, when you have the lead.
notice the perrenial power type teams are run heavy?
Offense sells tickets. Defense wins games. - Paul W. "Bear" Bryant
by TheRedTideConsumes on Jun 24, 2009 2:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Note on Ole Miss...
As some of you may have noticed, I did not include Ole Miss in this analysis, just as I did not include Arkansas last year. The reasoning in both cases was their widespread usage of the Wild Hog / Rebel, and with both teams using that so heavily, it made them effectively impossible to fit into this type of analysis. With tailbacks and wide receivers lining up at quarterback and occasionally throwing the football, etc. it’s just impossible to get a good grasp on what was actually going on without specifically breaking down the game film.
I will say, though, even if you apply this exact same methodology to Ole Miss’ 2008 season, they would have been one of the more run-heavy teams in the conference, but nothing overly special. They were 55% run and 45% pass, and the difference is negligible to the point that the overall conference run / pass splits only drops a few tenths of a percentage point as a whole.
by outsidethesidelines on Jun 24, 2009 4:14 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 
















